misspelledusernme

“almost”. They seem suspiciously relieved as they reach the driveway

I thought this part was interesting. People are correct about the amount of toxic content (~33%) but just missattributes it to an equivalent share of the population.

These findings reveal a striking pattern in how people misunderstand online toxicity. Participants drastically overestimated how many users posted toxic comments on social media—believing it was 38% when it is actually 3% (a 13-fold overestimation). However, they were nearly accurate about how much total content this set of users produces—estimating 38% when it is actually 33% (a 1.15-fold overestimation). This suggests people may encounter toxic content at roughly the expected volume but attribute it to far more widespread participation than actually occurs. Rather than recognizing a small group of highly active accounts, people appear to imagine toxic behavior as broadly distributed across the user base.

Fun fact. The jack of all trades idiom has evolved and been added to over the centuries. Here the conclusion of an analysis from stack exchange

Conclusions

To sum up, I offer this timeline of the earliest occurrences I could find for the various forms of jack of all trades and the proverbial phrases built up around it:

1618 Jack-of-all-trades

1631 Tom of all Trades

1639 John-of-all-trades

1721 Jack of all trades, and it would seem, Good at none

1732 Jack of all Trades is of no Trade

1741 Jack of all trades, and in truth, master of none

1785 a Jack of all trades, but master of none

1930 a Jack of all trades and a master of one

2007 Jack of all trades, master of none, though ofttimes better than master of one

The extra-long version of the expression may be considerably older than the 2007 earliest established occurrence might suggest—perhaps even a decade or two older. But it isn’t the original form of the expression; and in comparison with the forms that arose during the 1700s, it is quite young.